Reactions to the New Roman Missal Translation

Vatican officials forced the new Roman Missal English translation claiming it will increase reverence during Mass.  Much like townspeople admiring the Emperor’s new clothes in Hans Christian Andersen’s fairytale, predictably some very orthodox Catholics already eagerly agree.  However, though most people seem to comply with the new translation, enthusiastic belief that it increases reverence seems to be a minority reaction of those I’ve witnessed.

As mentioned in a previous blog article, the word order reminds some people of Yoda’s disjointed speech patterns but without Yoda’s coherent and profound wisdom.  For example, the priest now asks, “Be pleased, O God, to bless, we pray…” rather than simply, “God, please bless…”, and the congregation prays, “…on earth peace to people…” rather than “…peace to people on earth.”  These word order choices cause involuntary smiles, rolled eyes, groans and chuckles.  Maybe in some cultures those are signs of reverence.

I think church leaders do believe those are forms of reverence because as people stumble and fumble through the new translation, church leaders tell us to laugh, keep our sense of humor, and not take our participation in the Mass too seriously.  Oh…mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa (my fault, my fault, my most grievous fault).

The Yoda-like speech patterns are not the only source of “reverent” comedy in the new translation.  The new language also reminds some people of Mr. Collins, the comical obsequious Anglican priest character in Jane Austen’s novel “Pride and Prejudice”.  Mr. Collins perpetually sucks-up to his haughty, self-important benefactress, Lady Catherine de Bourgh, kowtowing to the point of buffoonery.  Priests now utter statements befitting Mr. Collins such as this, “Humbly we pray that, partaking of the Body and Blood of Christ, we may be gathered into one by the Holy Spirit.”   I can almost hear David Bamber, who played Mr. Collins in the BBC’s rendition of the story, reciting such a line.  Do church leaders truly think God who humbly became a poor homeless man has character and tastes similar to Lady Catherine?  Do they think the faithful are stupid toadies like Mr. Collins?   

In seeking condescension through flattery and flowery speech, the translation adds an extra comedic effect by misusing words.  The priest now prays, “Make holy, therefore, these gifts, we pray, by sending down your Spirit upon them like the dewfall” rather than “Let your Spirit come upon these gifts to make them holy.”  However, “dewfall” is actually a time of day not a thing.  Specifically it is the time of evening when dew forms.  Thus rather than pray that the Spirit romantically cover and soak our offering with holiness like dew covers the grass, the priest asks the Spirit to send night upon it.  What does that mean? 

According to the new translation, humble, impoverished Jesus now celebrates his Last Supper using a regal “chalice” rather than a simple “cup.”  This word choice launches still other people into “reverent” parodied versions of the “Chalice from the Palace” scene in “The Court Jester” movie.  This scene involves a pre-joust toast between Hawkins (played by comedian Danny Kaye) and the opposing knight.  Griselda, an ally of Hawkins, poisoned one of the drinks and they have this comical exchange clarifying which cup he should take.

Hawkins: I've got it! I've got it! The pellet with the poison's in the vessel with the pestle; the chalice from the palace has the brew that is true!  Right?
Griselda: Right. But there's been a change: they broke the chalice from the palace!
Hawkins: They broke the chalice from the palace?
Griselda: And replaced it with a flagon.
Hawkins: A flagon...?
Griselda: With the figure of a dragon.
Hawkins: Flagon with a dragon.
Griselda: Right.
Hawkins: But did you put the pellet with the poison in the vessel with the pestle?
Griselda: No!!! The pellet with the poison's in the flagon with the dragon! The vessel with the pestle has the brew that is true!
Hawkins: The pellet with the poison's in the flagon with the dragon; the vessel with the pestle has the brew that is true.
Griselda: Just remember that.

Maybe since Jesus in the sacramental precious blood is “the brew that is true”, translators believe he belongs in the “chalice from the palace.”  However, since the “chalice from the palace” broke, perhaps we should instead have Jesus using the “vessel with the pestle.”  On New Year’s Day the priest did call Mary a vessel that carried Jesus.  So, the “vessel with the pestle” did also carry, “the brew that is true.”  Nonetheless, this too inspires that rare form of “reverent” comedy that our church leaders seem to encourage these days.

People well schooled in Catholic teaching can only “reverently” laugh when the priest repeatedly refers to Jesus’ “holy and venerable hands”.  Since in Catholicism “venerable” is a term ascribed to people in their first step towards canonization, these people chuckle wondering why the translators demoted Jesus from being divine to being merely on his first step towards canonization.  They hope someday church leaders grant Jesus full canonization; he has after all performed numerous miracles – far more than blessed John Paul II who is on his next-to-last step towards canonization.

Others delight in “reverent” humor as the preface to the Sanctus now includes language reminiscent of Saturday morning cartoons.   For these people when the priest proclaims, “And so, with Angels and Archangels, with Thrones and Dominions, and with all the hosts and Powers of heaven”, it is difficult not to hear the narrator’s voice from  the “Super Friends” cartoon show adding, “…and with Batman, Robin, Aquaman, Superman, Wonder Woman, the Wonder Twins and the entire Hall of Justice League”.

Yet others enjoy “reverent” hilarity as people now say, “Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof” as reference to the “roof” conjures up the famous lyric, “the roof, the roof, the roof is on fire”, a lyric that should not in any way be associated with the Eucharist.

Perhaps all this “reverent” comedy built into the new translation is why a respected friend wondered if Monty Python could possibly parody the Mass any better than the farce we now have in the new translation.

I have fielded inquiries if the translators were on crack when they undertook the effort.  I think the narcotic of choice for the translators is actually power not crack. 

I do wonder why translators saw fit to turn the Mass into a “divine comedy” reminiscent of a bawdy theatrical troupe production.  And I do wonder how this seems more reverent to some people, but I appreciate that the Spirit validly and genuinely touches people in different ways.  However, why must we all be subjected to the spirituality of people like Mr. Collins?

In kindergarten I acted as a townsperson in a play of the Emperor’s New Clothes.  As a five-year-old tiny bit actress, I went along with the script admiring the emperor’s non-existent new clothes.  Now, I am a critical thinking adult who acts upon my conscience.  I decided I prefer genuine reverence rather than “reverent” comedy during Mass, regardless of how great church leaders say it is.  Therefore, I continue to say aloud the old responses and silently read from an old copy of the missal during the consecration. 

Do you find your participation in Mass more reverent with the new translation?  If not, what are you doing to address that?